Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= <bjorn@kernel.org>
To:     Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>
Cc:     arnd@arndb.de, palmer@rivosinc.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        peterz@infradead.org, luto@kernel.org, conor.dooley@microchip.com,
        heiko@sntech.de, jszhang@kernel.org, lazyparser@gmail.com,
        falcon@tinylab.org, chenhuacai@kernel.org, apatel@ventanamicro.com,
        atishp@atishpatra.org, palmer@dabbelt.com,
        paul.walmsley@sifive.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        zouyipeng@huawei.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
        David.Laight@aculab.com, chenzhongjin@huawei.com,
        greentime.hu@sifive.com, andy.chiu@sifive.com, ben@decadent.org.uk,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Guo Ren <guoren@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next V10 09/10] riscv: stack: Support
 HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK
In-Reply-To: <CAJF2gTT1YNubBG_RMzwsWVXk0X0nwQvTM2r5NjRvVN+1x1RHMw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20221208025816.138712-1-guoren@kernel.org>
 <20221208025816.138712-10-guoren@kernel.org>
 <87o7sew6ey.fsf@all.your.base.are.belong.to.us>
 <CAJF2gTT1YNubBG_RMzwsWVXk0X0nwQvTM2r5NjRvVN+1x1RHMw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 09 Dec 2022 08:49:52 +0100
Message-ID: <874ju59ftr.fsf@all.your.base.are.belong.to.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> writes:

> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 6:12 PM Bj=C3=B6rn T=C3=B6pel <bjorn@kernel.org> w=
rote:
>>
>> guoren@kernel.org writes:
>>
>> > From: Guo Ren <guoren@linux.alibaba.com>
>> >
>> > Add the HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK feature for the IRQ_STACKS config. T=
he
>> > irq and softirq use the same independent irq_stack of percpu by time
>> > division multiplexing.
>> >
>> > Tested-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
>> > Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@linux.alibaba.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  arch/riscv/Kconfig      |  7 ++++---
>> >  arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> > index 0a9d4bdc0338..bd4c4ae4cdc9 100644
>> > --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> > +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> > @@ -447,12 +447,13 @@ config FPU
>> >         If you don't know what to do here, say Y.
>> >
>> >  config IRQ_STACKS
>> > -     bool "Independent irq stacks" if EXPERT
>> > +     bool "Independent irq & softirq stacks" if EXPERT
>> >       default y
>> >       select HAVE_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK
>> > +     select HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK
>>
>> HAVE_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK is used by softirq.c Shouldn't that be
>> selected introduced in this patch, instead of the previous one?
> This patch depends on the previous one. And the previous one could
> work separately.

Let me try to be more clear: IRQ_STACKS should be introduced in the
previous patch, which adds per-cpu stacks to hardirq. This patch adds
per-cpu stacks for softirq, and the softirq related selects:

 select HAVE_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK
 select HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK

Hence, the "HAVE_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK" select should be part of *this*
patch, not the previous.

Or am I missing something?


Bj=C3=B6rn